Saturday, December 1, 2012

A Video inspired by My Bossier Commenters

Rex Moncrief, who publishes the blog Conservative Drink, has put up a video that was inspired by something I have also addressed, the comments on My Bossier.This is not particularly a pro-Nerren or pro-Graves video, it just address some of the more outrageous comments from My Bossier.Disclaimer: Rex, through his company, manages Whit Graves' campaign website.

75 comments:

Jim, you've just lost all credibility. You really state this video is not pro-Graves (it clearly is) and is admittedly produced by Graves' website guy. Come on Jim. Just say its a pro-graves spot and I could live with that. This blog is becoming a joke.

Rex...didn't take long to get hammered huh? Well done video, well said, intelligent commentary. At least the man can "man up" put his own name on something and tell us his thoughts. The fact is his commentary is all based in fact, something many people don't want to talk about on here.

6:28 - Rex is admittedly a Graves supporter, but the subject of the video was to address commenters and ask them to be specific. If you think that was pro-Graves, then fine. I didn't put it up to promote Whit Graves, I put it up because it discusses this blog.Your comments are becoming a joke.

The ENTIRE Nerren campaign has been run on that one issue (Outside of Nerren being a kids baseball coach) This is ALL he has. And the fact that this advertisement was designed to mislead and confuse the ordinary person, speaks volumes about any claims to integrity. I don't think the guy voted for Obama, that's not the point. It is the way he operates, working with a known liberal operative and paying for a piece that he would only later claim he knew nothing about, or didn't "approve". How come all the other literature across all political races has to be approved by the candidate, except Nerren's? So he misleads with his advertising, and doesn't take responsibility by denying fault on a liberal operative flyer, and this guy is supposed to be a judge, particularly knowing he is being financed and endorsed by the very office where we are supposed to have separation of powers???

Well Whit had a very misleading mailout,,made me think that people like Rex was thinking Nerren voted for Obama.I'm sorry the Whitley camp SAID Nerren voted for Obama..Another lie by the Whitley emps...COME ON WE CAN DO BETTER THAN THIS

@Tim - I would hope that Nerren wasn't dumb enough to vote for Obama...just on principle not to mention the fact that it would put him in the <30% side of Louisiana voters. Besides, even if he hypothetically voted for Obama, does anyone really think he would admit it?

Granted - I haven't even seen the mailout alluding to Nerren voting for Obama. Anyone have a copy to link or email to me?

Folks, try this on for size: young man gets into trouble and is facing jail time. The case is complicated and not what it appears to be. The evidence is sketchy and leaves a lot to be enterpreted. The conviction hinges on iffy testimony and assumptions. The Judge is selected and it is the DA's man Mike Nerren. The defense attorney asks for Nerren's recusal and it is denied. How you think the 2nd circuit gonna rule? remember the campaign flyer listing the endorsers? The DA's picture leaves the appellant court no choice. This will be repeated as long as Nerren serves causing havoc among other Judges.

Who is this guy? Ann, Mike and John Kay all said that they got the endorsment of the party for whit and that we cannot tell the SCC what to do. I was there, I heard it, its on tape. Who is the guy in this video?

Are you kidding? That happens 1000's of times a day in the US. Judges are elected-- just becasue your guy can't raise money and does not have a fan base, don't knock my first amendment right to speak with my money.

Rex how in the world can you comment on a local election when you have not taken time to get to know mike nerren. He is a 29 year conservative--- he is only being attacked because he is not a good ole boy. If you would read anything about him you would know that--- Also Ann and John ADMITTED that they had a phone call with the SCC and did not include nerren or whit and secured the endorsment-- WE asked how they did that and they said "we are not at liberty to tell you" Then we found out that they did not even include everyone of the SCC- then we found out that John Kay is whits campaign manager, on the SCC, and would not discuss anything to convince the pEC his vote was not biased.

Then we asked for a copy of the endorsment from the state---AND THEY HANDED THE PEC A PRESS RELEASE SIGNED BY JOHN KAY--- it was very awkward and even moreso because our PEC president is Whits biggest supporter and funneled the meeting towards a WHIT endorsment.

Once that was discovered everyone chose party over politics except Mike COllier and Ann Price.

THEN they said they did not produce a video, denied any knowledge of the video, but current evidence show that it most likely was produced by a local firm at the direction of whit's campaign manager.

Rex i'm dissappointed that you said you have not recieved the misleading mailout sent out by Whitley.Iwould think Whitley would have sent one being that you do a really good job of making video'S...and Rex everyone keeps trying to clearup 01-b-922..can you try?

John Kay is not evil-- but he clearly is continuing a very dangerous conflict of interest behavior that was championed by Robert Villery during the Dardenne race. During that race, villery served as President of the State GOP (the top fundriaser for the party) while he ran a very aggressive campaign against Jay Dardenne- a republican-- therefore he could not give money from the party to help the eventual winner. Clearly a conflict of interest, it damaged the party and we are still recovering from it.

So we have a leader of the State Republican Party that does not fear conflicts of interst, Chairwoman on the Executive Committee (Ann PRice) who crosses all lines in conflicts of interest, a president of the local pec (COllier)that openly promotes candidates and bad mouths all other republicans- even the new converts--who also sets up meetings to benefit his candidates, and then John Kay who actively votes on the SCC for his client to get an endorsment, when his contract with the candidate most likely provides for bounuses if endorsment are secured by him.

So hope this gets you up to speed-- read it again and do a little research.

IF you want to know how bad it is. Monday morning about 10 call the State GOP and ask them how they chose to endorse a candidate in a local race when his opponent was a republican. Tell them you support NERREN--- might want to record it like we have been doing.

Then call back a half hour later and tell them you are a whit supporter and John Kay asked you to call and show your support for WHIT-- record that one-- compare --- put up another little video with your findings.

Jim do you think after this election I can get a copy of this blog concerning this race from you in print form from day one? I'm thinking about writing a book.May ask Rex to produce a movie about this race.

@9:01 - Produced by a local firm? I doubt that. More than likely it was created and then a link emailed to John Kay. That's much like my video and blog posts today. I created them independently and then emailed John just to give him a heads up and a laugh at the "DEVIL" spoof.

If that video was produced by any "firm", then I hope like hell they were trying for the "amateur" look. Like I said, they did some research but their production quality was definitely sup-par.

How can I comment on a local election? Ummm - I'm part of the local electorate, and then there's that whole 1st Amendment thing...but I digress. You are correct in that I don't know Mike Nerren personally. However, I do know that he sent a mailout to my house which is definitely misleading. That's not a good first impression at all.

If Mike Nerren wants to call, email, or reply to clear up running a negative mail-out, then he's free to do so at any time.

@Tim - I can clear it up based on the documents. I have had no discussion about it with Whit or the campaign. It's pretty simple - Whit failed to file documentation as required by the court and was reprimanded. Nerren chose to dig it up and use it in the campaign. Pretty simple.

As far as the mail-outs, I am not consulted on everything. I provide website development, help tweak/create high resolution versions of logos, etc, share that data out with other people on the campaign as needed, upload videos for youtube, and created the Facebook page and graphics. That's about it.

Both Whit and Robin have been great to work with and have certainly treated me fairly. In my discussions with Whit, my opinion is that he is a no-bullsh*t type of guy. That is something I respect.

@9:08 - I'm sure that if either Jim or I get a copy of the written endorsement, then it will be published here and/or on my blog too. I also plan on creating another video as information comes in - such as the audio from the meeting.

John Kay is not the "campaign manager" lol where do you get your bogus information?

This board is LITTERED with PEC members that are for Nerren, in Marvin's back pocket (they call you something different in prison they tell me)

I have listened to the audio, and trust me everyone that stayed around after the vote was very unhappy about nerren's shenanigans over the darby matter. (im sure Rex will report on soon) Like Rex said, report FACTS, not speculation.

A911 if Collier promotes his clients, sets up meetings for his clients and writes checks and bad my the oppents thereof...man that is a candidates dream...I want him every time in my campaigns. Question is....why Nerren didn't get him? Chairman of Bossier Republicans and rich as sin? What happened?

Anon @ 9:11Why do you and all the Nerren people not mention the paid for ad for Obama by Nerren.Again no mention of that just more of the same, Whit is a liar, Kay is the Devil and the State had no cause and it was all crooked underhanded stuff.I commend the state GOP for not seeking to hide the truth from the Republicans of Bossier like Gattie, Thompson and gang.I wonder why Thompson didnt get the co endorsement of the state party when he visited them.Let me tell you why, because he couldnt explain why a Republican would have paid for a push card promoting Barack Obama.On second thought since Jeff has no problem with it why dont he explain the finance reports and names on the card and better yet explain Nerren's PEC meeting statement. No its easier to say liar, devil, etc than tell the truth.

The state party endorsed whit because of a phone call from John Kay and Ann Price-- they both admitted this at the PEC meeting this week. We know the whole state central committee was not included because we have called all the reps in this area and Duke Lowrie, Charles Jacobs and Laura Adley were not included-- amoung other members of the State Central Committee. John and Ann are the only ones on the call.

The PEC has both candidates there to explain what happened. Before the meeting Ann and MIKE told most of the PEC members that Mike supported OBAMA and contributed to and voted for OBAMA. This was a lie. The flyer was not an endorsment of Obama-- it was an endorsment of NERREN.

The video is polished and was made by a local firm for free or their facilities, harware and software were donated-- they usually charge a fee-- proof on this coming-- might even be after the race when listed by law as an in kind contribution by that person or firm.

REX you admittedly are against NERREN and getting money from the Whit Campaign-- you have a conflict in writing a blog and stating your one sided-- so you are going to listen to the audio that should be great-- once you and John Kay and whit finish transcribing it maybe you can filter it through Mike and Ann and then share the UNBAISED result with us.

Everyone knows whit produced the video and who produced the video, the issue was Whit was bold enough to state while being recorded at the PEC meeting that he did not have anything to do with the video, his campaign (including Kay) did not have anything to do with the video, that is was home made-- this simply is not plausible. No one makes a video like that for free-- this is COlliers making with Kay and a local company-- the Flyer was added at the last minute-- all this is known, but whit stated HE KNEW NOTHING ABOUT IT. He could have easily said, I did it or I had input or my campaign guys had input, but he said -- he knew nothing about it.

9:56 The state party has an executive board who were made aware of a push card that was produced then supported and funded by a Republican candidate in a judges race. The push card reflects that, the finance reports of nerren reflect that, and he didnt deny it at the pec meeting.So Anne or John are the ones who made the executive board aware. Big deal, if whitt had done it he should have been called on it as well. But he didnt Nerren did.

at 947-- the PEC listened to all the hubub about the flyer, going into the meeting we were all going to vote to endorse whit because the state party must have done its homework and we did not want to look liberal. About half way through the meeting it was apperant that Mike and Ann had not been truthful with us about the facts surrounding the flyer. The evidence was not produced and we could not connect the dots between Nerren and supporting OBAMA. it wasn't factual, it was political. In fact, when we asked to look at the endorsement from the state party we were told it was VERBAL. Then John Kay produced a Press Release with his name on it and said that was proof of the endorsment. At that point everyone in the room was pretty sure we were being bamboozled -- a motion was called and passed. If true proof would have been given that Nerren was not a republican I can guarantee you the vote would have been different. But after the vote Collier and Ann showed their true colors and Ann who was not at liberty to speak before the vote--sure did speak her mind. Two people changed their minds after the evidence was heard. You could tell by the body language they were uncomfortable misleading the group.

also it was appearant by the way Collier handled the meeting and how ann would not answer any questions-- that they thought everyone would vote the way they planned. Luckily two guys changed their votes.

I will take a $100,000 bet, or a $1,000,00 bet, or any amount that graves had zero to do with the video. I challenge anyone. Provide once ounce of evidence or proof. you cant, it doesn't exist. Make me rich.

I am Anon at 10:15, It's just speculation that nothing would happen unless there was evidence. I'm unable to tell you where or what software produced it because I simply do not know. If it was made by a company, I guess it would show up in the in-kind donations sheet. Anything besides that is pure speculation until clearly proven evidence is shown. It's not guilty until proven innocent.

Also, it's very true there is evidence in cyber-space. It's usually difficult to find though.

at 936-- good question, nerren did not get him because Collier had to find a lawyer who would run for judge and then be willing to give up that judicial seat to run for DA in two years. Colliers plan is for Whit to win and then at an agred upon time that coincides with the DA's race, whit will announce that he cannot do his job as judge because the DA's office is so "corrupt". Then Whit will run for DA. Not every potential judical candidate thinks thats a good deal. But we have never seen this much talk about a DA in a judges race, so its evident the three year plan is being implemented.

Whit seemed the most likely pick for COLLIER because whit ran smear campaigns against in two other judicial races.

Collier is running his candidate for DA not judge -- because of a personal issue that happend a few years ago with the current DA, he admits this openly when asked. its most likely on the tape if you have the extended one.

So Whit is the only one that Collier could find to run a dirty campaign against a DA in a judge's race. Several probably turned that offer down before whit accepted.

Jim, you and I just gonna have to disagree but your comments are no longer objective. You said the video is not "particlarly pro-Graves or pro-Nerren". I looked at it 4 times now and it's not only made by the Graves website guy, it's nothing but pro-Graves!!! Come on, be honest Jim. Listen to that thing and them comment.

10:32 - You made a reasonable comment so I will give you a reasonable answer. I went back and listened again and there is some truth to what you say. It is more pro-Graves than I realized, I was really more interested in what Rex was saying about the blog's comments.And for the record - Nerren supporters have insisted that I am pro-Graves, when I have not been. I have endorsed no one, although I certainly could if I chose to. If the Nerren camp chooses not to send me press releases, flyers etc. while the Graves people do, that is fine, but don't accuse me of being one-sided as a result.

10:31 - "But we have never seen this much talk about a DA in a judges race ." Where were you in 2008 during the Craig-Burchett race?

at 1012 -- it is a big deal. when any group gives an endorsement they interview both parties either in writing or in person. Especially if its a race with two candidates from the same party and its the party giving the endorsement. The times, local unions, etc all to in person interviews as a courtesy before endorsing.

Prior to the meeting, the PEC thought this had happended and NERREN was just sour grapes-- we thought another RINO has been exposed. but during the meeting we all realized our friends had lied to us for political reasons. It was quite pitiful and may lead to the resignation of several members because they are disgusted and sick of being lied to and used as pawns.

If Nerren had not shown up, then we would not have known his side of this and would have compounded the wrong the state started. Thank God questions were asked and bullying was stifled.

1043-- i dont care what the video contains-- whit's camp said they had no input into the production of it. That means john kay did not have anything to do with it or anyone else is whits camp. So how did the producer get a clear copy of the flyer? who brought that flyer physically to the maker of the video? anyone know the answer to that?

anon 1031...sounds like you are close friends with collier, based on your "intimate knowledge" nice to know we have the inside scoop now. basically, you are a PEC member, so man up and post your true identity...I didn't think so.

do you really think someone did this independent of the campaign's involvement? made a 9 minute video with political quotes and newspaper ads in their free time? and then a made for tv version of under 4 minutes. yes it is hard to believe- but the truth is close.

at 11:09-- so I should beleive Nerren supported OBAMA, Whit has not been negative, Whit and his camp did not help with the video or ask that it be made, that Jim and REX are neutral in this election, Collier's passion in this race is for the party not personal, Ann price loves the party more than polictics and its ok for John Kay to where three conflicting hats at one time.

sure -- you win. I will toss deductive and inductive logic out the window and succumb to your jedi mind trick.

its kind of like when ricki bobby would say "no offense" and then say something offensive. Jim and Rex say "we are not biased" and then say something biased, but because of the preface statement its not biased--- your either first or last.

--------@9:51 - The video is polished and was made by a local firm for free or their facilities, harware and software were donated-- they usually charge a fee--------

You are kidding me right? Polished? Again, it took some time to research the cases and contributions (which are public information), but the video IS NOT polished. Again, I applaud them for the information research, but…

Hell, I created mine in under an hour including posting it to youtube, and I wasn't really trying hard. If somebody normally charges for video like that (and violating copyright on music too), then I'm not charging enough for my services. LMAO

--------@9:56 - getting money from the Whit Campaign…you have a conflict in writing a blog and stating your one sided…maybe you can filter it through Mike and Ann--------

Ummm - how can there be a conflict when I state that I am one-sided? That doesn't even begin to make sense. I have already disclaimed that I am the web developer for whitgraves.com.

Yep - I was paid to develop the website and assist with other tech issues. However, I am not paid to blog or comment on other blogs. You can note the disclaimers I've posted several times.

For the record, I don't know Mike. I do know Ann Price from my work with Duke Lowrie, but I can assure you that I won't be filtering anything through anyone if/when I receive a copy of the audio.

--------@10:16 - was it home made at a home using personal software?--------

Really that doesn't matter. There is a fine line between "home" and "office" these days as an independent IT person. In this case, it boils down to production quality. I would hope that no professional multimedia producer would release video that is subpar as is the case with both the long and short version.

Based on that, my speculation is that it was created by an individual who had the time to do the research and just enough knowledge of video software to be dangerous to the Nerren campaign.

Of course, that's just my speculation. It's not like I do this sort of thing for a living…..oh wait.

----------@11:21 - and Rex say "we are not biased" and then say something biased----------

Huh? Please show me where I've ever said that I am not biased? I'm biased as hell and readily admit it. That's why I have an OPINION blog, and I base my opinion on facts and logic.

Now, in my video blog I did mention the fact that Whit had a deferred suspension around the 2:45 mark. It's not like I try to dance around that subject. It happened, Whit was reprimanded, life moves on.

A1031. Good morning, just decided after a few days to look at the blogs. Whew, Collier works in a hurry since the man has hardly been back from Houston. He was gone for over a year getting a transplant. Sure, Collier was bitter about his best friend losing his job. That was four years ago and Judge Burchett is dead. Water has flowed under the bridge. Any candidate that wins Judge and then quits to run highly difficult race against an incumbent District Attorney would be insane. As for you PEC members who feel the meeting was unfair just get a petition together with the mandated signatures and demand his resignation. Go out and do something good this day for your candidate. Go hold up a sign, or shake a few hands or make some calls but making wild accusations on here doesn't get it.

Collier and his henchmen (the original good ole boys network) made a secret pact in a barn the night the late Burchette was defeated. The pact was that Burchette's defeat would never be forgotten and that revenge would be accomplished at all costs. Can't wait for 2014 when there will be two judge spots up for election. One thing is guaranteed Collier will be hard working behind the scenes in that election also.

Rex , you are all for the video .. Hmm seems like you are giving props to whoever made it. Was it you Rex? Everyone says Nerren attacked first , HAHA let me let you in on a little secret .. GRAVES STARTED ALL THIS ! Talking about Nerren's KIDS and his family ! LYING and saying stuff in push cards about Nerren. Now Nerren is a life long republican & Graves says he voted a Democrate president ? Makes sense . NOT ! Graves says Nerren is raciest , thats FAR from the truth ! Nerren does not care about the color of your skin ! But Graves basically said if you arent White Or Republican you are basically nothing. Nerren would never say or feel that way because he doesnt judge people on race , Graves seems very scared and i think thats why he has to keep attacking Nerren ! My vote has been for Nerren and its still for NERREN !!!!!!!!!!!!

Hell Rex i bet they made that Tom cat in about 30 seconds.The thing about that Tom Cat video was pretty much wraps up the Whitley camp complaining.Has anybody seen that written endosement yet????????????????or is still verbal

Rules of the road:1. No personal attacks or insults.2. No accustory statements about wrongdoing or criminal acts against anyone.3. Say all you want about the pros and cons concerning the candidates and the issues, or the general subject of the blog post, just follow Rule #1 and Rule #2.

Wow Jim, thanks for the post and your site, very informative. Your interest and commitment to LA politics is amazing and inspiring; can you clone yourself 49 times and spread it around?

...good lord - you are as bad as the times...

smells like donkey in here

I enjoy reading your posts.

why don't you add this to your comments - your blog sucks

I do not know how I stumbled upon your pitiful blog, but apparently you do not know anything about

Great Blog!

Thanks, Jim, for providing a good forum for discussing the candidates.

Love your blog. It makes my day!!!

It's people like you, Jim, that ruin our system.

The only shortcomings of this blog is that more people may not be reading it.

I just looked at the posts. comical. Ada's drunk, corrupt cops caught on tape, some crazy lady making "art" about it (I looked at her "art" and I now know why they have starving artists shows), a Benton hillbilly running a blog about it.Come on Hollywood, this is a great B movie.

I hope you realize that very few people actually read your little blog - but keep on writing if it makes you feel important.